Cabin twist from engine torque

[Unster]

I do think that BeamNG uses soft body physics so (for how little I know) it's more advanced than any traditional method.
Also, simulating tire deformation is one thing, simulating tire+suspension behaviour is another since it's like having springs mounted on other springs, and tires are really weird spring nontheless

Soft body physics is one unique aspect of BeamNG and that allows the realistic deformation & flex, but it's much more than that that makes for the realistic driving experience. It's their approach to simulating every part of a vehicle and how the parts interact, just like in real life. For example, vehicle acceleration doesn't happen arbitrarily from some simplified code, but it's the engine itself that rotates the crankshaft which transfers torque to the transmission which modifies and transfers torque to the driveshaft and eventually all the way to the tires which interact with the ground. So things like cabin twist aren't hardcoded at all and are simply a natural effect of the physics. It's beautiful.

[Optional Features]

Yeah, and the MTG trucks sound really good at low RPM as well. The engine kinda growls.

[Unster]

Yeah, and the MTG trucks sound really good at low RPM as well. The engine kinda growls.

Some of them do, but others like the school bus sounds like a vacuum cleaner. Also the engine sounds are reused and there's no change when you switch to the driver view, so in that aspect ATS is better.

[Optional Features]

Ah yeah, I mainly used the International.

[fratrac]

It's beautiful.

Definitely :3

[rsr]

I really like this thread, please go on. Maybe some kind dev will actually pay attention to these requests and do something about what REALLY matters in this game, physics.

[rsr]

No sarcasm: yes suspension height tuning was certainly more important than modeling chassis flex due to engine torque. Because with many trucks running on air suspension this feature is often used in real life. Cabin twist due to engine torque is almost non-existent/not noticeable on normal modern trucks, it will certainly not influence the game or game-play in a way that controllable air suspension can.

As for the other changes you mention: that is called moving goalposts. Each time a new feature is introduced a small group of people immediately jump on it to complain why their list of important to them features have not been implemented. And that will never stop, no matter what SCS does, there will always be parts of the physical truck that are not simulated in-game.

I would love to have a physical simulation like BeamNG and a wheel/tire simulation like for example Assetto Corsa or rfactor. But ETS2/ATS is a mix of a large world playable map with a driving simulator and has the compromises of both.

Can you please enlighten me on what big impact on gameplay does the "adjustable air suspension" have for you that makes it more important than a basic physics feature? IIRC I may had only used it like 3 times and haven't touched it since then.

[xXCARL1992Xx]

it is needed the moment we get swap bodies so you can even drive under them, not every swap body chassis comes with a lift of its own, some just use the suspension of the truck

[Space_Night]

@rsr
also some of the larger tyres (in ETS mainly) the base ride height was affected so you could not hitch up. now you pull up, drop the air, go under, raise the air and back onto the pin. just like how you do it in real life

you can also raise the truck up to avoid it bottoming out on the ramp at Dover or on the dirt road from Bellingham timber yard

[The_SimTrucker]

In my personal opinion air suspension simulation is a must higher priority than cabin twist due to torque. For reason mentioned above but also because many trucks these days have air suspension and it is silly that modern trucks in ATS/ETS2 did not have ride height control.

Of-course life is not perfect. My biggest gripe with the truck physics is that the game does not simulate solid axles. The tires go straight up and down independently left and right when going over a bump or curb. This in combination with the completely rigid chassis that only pivots around the center of gravity does make it a pretty poor simulation of real life.

Chassis and tire dynamics are difficult to simulate, there is a surprising amount of math behind it. But the thing with trucks is that 99% of all trucks have the same chassis width and almost the same suspension attachment points. Yes I'm generalizing a bit, but overall an axle has 4 points of attachment to the chassis (being either a leaf, 2 fixed points and 2 bags, or 4 bags). SCS has proven with the air suspension they can move the attachment points without changing the existing models. If they can add 4 default points above each axle which represent the load bearing points to which the axle will push against the chassis and do the physics calculations from there then that would be such a step forward. And that would automatically give you chassis flex if the load on one point is more than on another point. And once you have that then implementing torque twist is the same calculation: engine torque "pushing" against whatever is defined as the motor mounts.